672 lines
23 KiB
Plaintext
672 lines
23 KiB
Plaintext
From: Digestifier <Linux-Development-Request@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu>
|
||
To: Linux-Development@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu
|
||
Reply-To: Linux-Development@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu
|
||
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 94 12:13:05 EDT
|
||
Subject: Linux-Development Digest #112
|
||
|
||
Linux-Development Digest #112, Volume #2 Sat, 3 Sep 94 12:13:05 EDT
|
||
|
||
Contents:
|
||
Re: mmap( ..., PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, ... ) WHY NOT? (David Miller)
|
||
[Q] Multi-session PhotoCD & SCSI (Thomas Quinot)
|
||
sb_dsp_operations undeclared 1.1.46 (Sam Gentile)
|
||
Re: tar to st0 (Exabyte tape) causes kernel panic (Rob Janssen)
|
||
Re: Write-protect floppy hassles (Rob Janssen)
|
||
Re: MSDOS FS dates off by 5 days! (Slackware 2.0 bug?) (nozomi@glaucomys.seino.tsukuba.ac.jp)
|
||
Re: Future of linux -- the sequel (Bill Broadley)
|
||
Re: XFree & CDROM slow down transfer rate (root)
|
||
Re: XFree & CDROM slow down transfer rate ("Simon P Allen")
|
||
IDE Performance enhancement (Patrick Doyle)
|
||
Re: Linux - my first impressions (Kees J. Bot)
|
||
Status: PAS16 SCSI driver (Lenny Turetsky)
|
||
Re: Which kernel should I get for PPP (Al Longyear)
|
||
Re: ext2fs floppy/82077 corruption with 1.1.49 (Chris Smith)
|
||
Re: Future of linux -- the sequel (Orc)
|
||
dlfcn; dynamic loading (Richard L. Goerwitz)
|
||
|
||
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: davem@er4.rutgers.edu (David Miller)
|
||
Subject: Re: mmap( ..., PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, ... ) WHY NOT?
|
||
Date: 1 Sep 1994 21:20:02 -0400
|
||
|
||
Russell Leighton (rrl@access3.digex.net) wrote:
|
||
: Writing to mmap'd files does not seem to be supported under Linux:
|
||
|
||
: mmap( ..., PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, ... )
|
||
|
||
Correct, this is not implemented as of yet (1.1.pre50 kernel).
|
||
Due to some of the bogus parts of the i386 memory management
|
||
facilities, an implementation of this is very difficult. Nevertheless
|
||
this one of the projects in line for post-1.2.0 kernels, so stay
|
||
tuned. Actually if you are somewhat proficient with kernel hacking,
|
||
you can take out the checks for this particular situation and what you
|
||
are left with almost works! Much of the necessary code is already
|
||
there but sanity checked out...
|
||
|
||
There are ways around this. In particular, right now I am
|
||
almost getting and emacs build to work under elf libraries. The first
|
||
big problem I ran into was this particular mmap() thing you speak of.
|
||
Basically as a work around I did the following.
|
||
|
||
The origional statement is:
|
||
|
||
new_base = mmap (0, new_file_size, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED,
|
||
new_file, 0);
|
||
|
||
I changed that to...
|
||
|
||
new_base = mmap (0, new_file_size, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE,
|
||
new_file, 0);
|
||
|
||
|
||
Then, right before the file descriptor gets closed I do a:
|
||
|
||
|
||
Mailbox is '/usr/spool/mail/davem' with 0 messages [ELM
|
||
2.4 PL23]
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Mailbox is '/usr/spool/mail/davem' with 0 messages [ELM
|
||
2.4 PL23]
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Subject: Re: mmap( ..., PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, ... ) WHY NOT?
|
||
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development
|
||
References: <345b07$ari@access3.digex.net>
|
||
Distribution:
|
||
|
||
Russell Leighton (rrl@access3.digex.net) wrote:
|
||
: Writing to mmap'd files does not seem to be supported under Linux:
|
||
|
||
: mmap( ..., PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, ... )
|
||
|
||
Correct, this is not implemented as of yet (1.1.pre50 kernel).
|
||
Due to some of the bogus parts of the i386 memory management
|
||
facilities, an implementation of this is very difficult. Nevertheless
|
||
this one of the projects in line for post-1.2.0 kernels, so stay
|
||
tuned. Actually if you are somewhat proficient with kernel hacking,
|
||
you can take out the checks for this particular situation and what you
|
||
are left with almost works! Much of the necessary code is already
|
||
there but sanity checked out...
|
||
|
||
There are ways around this. In particular, right now I am
|
||
almost getting and emacs build to work under elf libraries. The first
|
||
big problem I ran into was this particular mmap() thing you speak of.
|
||
Basically as a work around I did the following.
|
||
|
||
The origional statement is:
|
||
|
||
new_base = mmap (0, new_file_size, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
|
||
MAP_SHARED,
|
||
new_file, 0);
|
||
|
||
I changed that to...
|
||
|
||
new_base = mmap (0, new_file_size, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
|
||
MAP_PRIVATE,
|
||
new_file, 0);
|
||
|
||
|
||
Then, right before the file descriptor gets closed I do a:
|
||
|
||
write(new_file, (char *) (new_file_h), new_file_size);
|
||
|
||
Yuck! Yes, I know, but you can get the same effect you are looking for
|
||
in most cases. And this is precisely my point. :-)
|
||
|
||
Later,
|
||
David S. Miller
|
||
davem@eden.rutgers.edu
|
||
davem@remus.rutgers.edu
|
||
davem@usacs.rutgers.edu
|
||
davem@bazooka.rutgers.edu
|
||
davem@linux.helsinki.fi
|
||
|
||
: This seems to be a MAJOR limitation, since I am new to Linux, is this
|
||
: right? If so, how to fix it?
|
||
|
||
: Russ
|
||
|
||
: --
|
||
: Russell Leighton
|
||
: Taylor Computing
|
||
: russ@taylor.digex.net taylor@world.std.com
|
||
: http://taylor.digex.net http://www.digex.net/~rrl/Welcome.html
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: thomas@melchior.frmug.fr.net (Thomas Quinot)
|
||
Subject: [Q] Multi-session PhotoCD & SCSI
|
||
Date: 2 Sep 1994 02:22:36 +0200
|
||
|
||
Is there a way of reading multi-session Kodak Photo-CD disks with an
|
||
Apple CD300 (no flames please :-)) ) SCSI CD-Rom drive ?
|
||
|
||
The adapter is an Adaptec 1540B, and the kernel is 1.1.49.
|
||
|
||
AdvTHANKSance for any advice.
|
||
--
|
||
Thomas QUINOT | "Un roi sans divertissement est un
|
||
<thomas@melchior.frmug.fr.net> | homme plein de mis<69>re."
|
||
Linux - choice of a GNU generation | Jean GIONO
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: owlmed@mv.mv.com (Sam Gentile)
|
||
Subject: sb_dsp_operations undeclared 1.1.46
|
||
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 1994 13:02:07 GMT
|
||
|
||
I am trying to build 1.1.46 and got the following problem:
|
||
sb_dsp.c: In function 'sb_dsp_init':
|
||
sb_dsp.c:815: 'sb_dsp_operations'undeclared
|
||
|
||
followed by a series of warnings. I also had this problem trying to build
|
||
1.1.36. I have not been able to build any kernel after 1.0. I have entered
|
||
notes here that have gone un-answered. Please help me. I have a
|
||
non-functional system and I can't resolve this myself.
|
||
|
||
Thanks,
|
||
Sam
|
||
|
||
|
||
--
|
||
============================================================================
|
||
Sam Gentile Mitakuye Oyasin - All My Relations
|
||
owlmed@pub.mv.com Live in balance with Mother Earth and
|
||
owlmed@iss1.com all of Creation
|
||
=============================================================================
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org (Rob Janssen)
|
||
Subject: Re: tar to st0 (Exabyte tape) causes kernel panic
|
||
Reply-To: pe1chl@rabo.nl
|
||
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 1994 20:38:59 GMT
|
||
|
||
In <345b6r$b1i@access3.digex.net> rrl@access3.digex.net (Russell Leighton) writes:
|
||
|
||
|
||
>I am able to read from st0 (Exabyte 8200) but
|
||
>when I write, the kernel panics...is this a known bug? ...
|
||
>what to do? (I am new to Linux ~1day experience).
|
||
|
||
The first thing you are normally supposed to do is to include the
|
||
details of the panic...
|
||
Preferably also find out in which function it happened. See the
|
||
README file in /usr/src/linux for some detail.
|
||
|
||
Rob
|
||
--
|
||
=========================================================================
|
||
| Rob Janssen | AMPRnet: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org |
|
||
| e-mail: pe1chl@rabo.nl | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8UTR.#UTR.NLD.EU |
|
||
=========================================================================
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org (Rob Janssen)
|
||
Subject: Re: Write-protect floppy hassles
|
||
Reply-To: pe1chl@rabo.nl
|
||
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 1994 20:50:16 GMT
|
||
|
||
In <3469pq$ppt@news.cs.tulane.edu> butler@cs.tulane.edu (Larry Butler) writes:
|
||
|
||
>In article <345tju$poj@nntp.ucs.ubc.ca>, Andrew Daviel <advax@triumf.ca> wrote:
|
||
>>
|
||
>>I would like to see some checking done at mount time, so that mount
|
||
>>would only mount a write-protected device readonly. Then I'd get a message
|
||
>>on stderr when I tried to write to it.
|
||
>>
|
||
|
||
>There has been much discussion about this and the exact same conclusion has
|
||
>been reached by many other people. I don't understand why this problem
|
||
>hasn't been addressed.
|
||
|
||
But it *has* been addressed! With the new kernels you *do get* an error
|
||
message when mounting!
|
||
|
||
(no version numbers were specified so probably both of you were running
|
||
1.0.x kernels)
|
||
|
||
Rob
|
||
--
|
||
=========================================================================
|
||
| Rob Janssen | AMPRnet: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org |
|
||
| e-mail: pe1chl@rabo.nl | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8UTR.#UTR.NLD.EU |
|
||
=========================================================================
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: nozomi@glaucomys.seino.tsukuba.ac.jp
|
||
Subject: Re: MSDOS FS dates off by 5 days! (Slackware 2.0 bug?)
|
||
Date: 1 Sep 94 23:59:02 GMT
|
||
|
||
In article <33uv4m$5fm@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>
|
||
a.vignani@CRFV3.CRF.IT (Alberto Vignani) writes:
|
||
|
||
> In fs/msdos/misc.c, line 232 (for 1.1.48):
|
||
> secs += sys_tz.tz_minuteswest*60;
|
||
> was the source of the trouble: minuteswest holded a larger value
|
||
> (EET difference+5 days).
|
||
|
||
Not +5 days, but EET diff * 60 seconds.
|
||
sys_tz.tz_minuteswest sustains not minute, but seconds!
|
||
Try
|
||
|
||
secs += sys_tz.tz_minuteswest;
|
||
|
||
It works at least in Japan :-P
|
||
Of course, its better to set tz_minute in munute....
|
||
--
|
||
NoZomi Ytow
|
||
nozomi@glaucomys.seino.tsukuba.ac.jp
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: broadley@turing.ucdavis.edu (Bill Broadley)
|
||
Subject: Re: Future of linux -- the sequel
|
||
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 1994 01:30:06 GMT
|
||
|
||
: What? I was unaware that any company was still making such slow
|
||
: machines. You can get a VL bus motherboard with MIPS R4600 processor
|
||
: that makes Pentium look like a 4.77 8086. Why waste money on such
|
||
: a junky architecture as Intel when there are good processors available.
|
||
|
||
Heh. Have some numbers to back this up?
|
||
|
||
Lets look at spec:
|
||
SGI IndyPC R4600 50/100 16/16 62.8 49.9 May94 SGI anno
|
||
SGI IndySC R4600 66/133 512+16/16 93.7 72.9 Aug94 SGI anno
|
||
Micrnics M4P 80486DX4 33/100 256+16 51.4 26.6 Mar94 comp.arch(Intel)
|
||
SNI PCE5S Pentium 60 256+8/8 60.6 55.1 Sep93 SPEC newsletter
|
||
SNI PCE5S Pentium 90 256+8/8 86.3 72.7 Jul94 comp.benchmarks
|
||
SNI PCE5S Pentium 100 256+8/8 96.2 81.2 Jul94 comp.benchmarks
|
||
Intel XPRESS Pent815 100 512+8/8 100.0 80.6 Mar94 comp.arch(Intel)
|
||
|
||
Hmm indy 4600 doen't make the pentium look like a 8086 to me...
|
||
|
||
: Compare the price/performance of processors and Intel comes out to
|
||
: make the worst processors in existence. PowerPC chips provide twice
|
||
|
||
Do end users care about price performance of the chip or the system?
|
||
Can you buy a motherboard thats faster and cheaper then
|
||
the numerous p-90/100 pci motherboards out there? Does it run unix/linux?
|
||
|
||
: the performance of Pentium at half the cost. That means they are
|
||
: 4 times as good. PowerPC is considered slow compared to some other
|
||
: processors on the market. For myself, I am just trying to decide
|
||
: which non-Intel motherboard to get. They do not cost anywhere near
|
||
: $10K.
|
||
|
||
Hmm so theres a 200 specint 160 specfp $500 chip thats shipping today?
|
||
Available in systems?
|
||
|
||
--
|
||
Bill Broadley Broadley@math.ucdavis.edu UCD Math Sys-Admin
|
||
Linux is great. Bike to live, live to bike. PGP-ok
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: root@blake.wadham.ox.ac.uk (root)
|
||
Subject: Re: XFree & CDROM slow down transfer rate
|
||
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 94 14:34:05 BST
|
||
|
||
Rob Janssen (rob@pe1chl.ampr.org) wrote:
|
||
: In <CvJ4y6.9B6@news.tudelft.nl> stock@dutsh7.tudelft.nl (Robert Stockmann) writes:
|
||
: >When running XFree and using a cdrom device I notice
|
||
: >that the transfer rate of my scsi disk slows down.
|
||
: >When not running XFree no decrease in transferrate can be observed.
|
||
: >If however XFree (openwin) is started the transfer rate is slowed down.
|
||
: >normally I get 5.6 Mbyte/sec but under X11 when /dev/sr0 is accessed
|
||
: >or has been accessed the transfer rate goes down to 500 to 700 kbyte/sec..
|
||
|
||
: 5.6 Mbyte/sec on a CDROM?? You must be kidding...
|
||
|
||
: Even 500 to 700 Kbyte/s is top-of-the-bill, and not achievable with the
|
||
: drive you specify.
|
||
|
||
: Rob
|
||
|
||
I think if you read what he wrote he is saying that the transfer rate on his
|
||
scsi HARD DISK drops when he accesses his scsi CDROM.
|
||
|
||
Paul Murray
|
||
<root@blake.wadham.ox.ac.uk>
|
||
<Paul.Murray@Wadham.Oxford.ac.uk>
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: simonallen@cix.compulink.co.uk ("Simon P Allen")
|
||
Subject: Re: XFree & CDROM slow down transfer rate
|
||
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 1994 14:25:02 GMT
|
||
|
||
|
||
What you are likely seeing is the buffer cache in action. I could beleive
|
||
that you *seem* to get something like 5.6Mb/s but your only reading from
|
||
system RAM at that speed. When X is loaded some of the buffers get
|
||
tossed out and Linux has to go to the real hardware for data. This
|
||
almost *has* to be the explaination because like the gentleman said, 'The
|
||
CD-ROM you got aint gonna do that speed'.
|
||
|
||
Cheers & beers, Simon.
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: wdoyle@hilbert.coe.northeastern.edu (Patrick Doyle)
|
||
Subject: IDE Performance enhancement
|
||
Date: 3 Sep 1994 14:36:29 GMT
|
||
|
||
|
||
I was wondering if anybody has had a similar experience. I have
|
||
installed 1.1.49 and tried recompiling one module of the kernel with
|
||
hdparm enhancements disabled and then with them enabled. There was no
|
||
appreciable difference in performance. The details are as follows:
|
||
|
||
33 MHz 386DX w/ 8M RAM
|
||
240MD Maxtor IDE hard drive (hdb -- hda is a 120 MB Maxtor w/ DOS)
|
||
-- Buffsize=64Kb, MaxMultSect=32
|
||
|
||
w/o hdparm enhancments, time make zImage yielded:
|
||
150.73 user
|
||
23.67 system
|
||
3:24.44 elapsed
|
||
85% CPU
|
||
|
||
w/ hdparm -m 16 -u1 /dev/hdb, time make zImage (after touching
|
||
sbpcd.c)
|
||
152.xx user
|
||
25.xx system
|
||
3:27.xx elapsed
|
||
85% CPU
|
||
|
||
Note, I tend to recompile the kernel while running in an X window, so
|
||
there is certainly some amount of swapping being performed (onto /dev/hdb).
|
||
One thing I have noticed is that the load average when compiling is
|
||
around 1.5 to 3.0. Does this imply that my compiles are CPU-bound, so
|
||
regardless of what I do to improve the I/O, it's not going to make
|
||
much of a difference?
|
||
|
||
I saw similar performance (lack of) differences with a previous
|
||
version of the kernel (1.1.whatever was distributed by Yggdrasil) as
|
||
well as with compiling the Mach kernel (these are the two benchmarks
|
||
that mean the most to me).
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: kjb@cs.vu.nl (Kees J. Bot)
|
||
Subject: Re: Linux - my first impressions
|
||
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 1994 15:16:08 GMT
|
||
|
||
rob@pe1chl.ampr.org (Rob Janssen) writes:
|
||
|
||
>In <CvI5oG.1n0@cs.vu.nl> kjb@cs.vu.nl (Kees J. Bot) writes:
|
||
|
||
>>Under SunOS the installboot(8) program installs the bootstrap and the
|
||
>>addresses to /boot into the boot block. This only needs to be done
|
||
>>once, because /boot never changes.
|
||
|
||
>>The LILO method is rather crude.
|
||
|
||
>I don't think so...
|
||
|
||
>- LILO does not require the boot image to be on contiguous sectors
|
||
|
||
No requirement of any other loader I know.
|
||
|
||
>- LILO can boot many different kernels and also other operating systems
|
||
|
||
Many different kernels *if* all of them have been mapped. They must be
|
||
carefully mapped whenever a new kernel is installed. That's what I mean
|
||
with crude.
|
||
|
||
Booting other operating systems is trivial. It is not something that
|
||
makes LILO stand out.
|
||
|
||
>I think it is a good program, and running its installer after building
|
||
>the kernel is not a problem at all. It is even done in the same
|
||
>"make zlilo" command.
|
||
|
||
Inflexible.
|
||
I like to hack code on one system, copy the resulting kernel image to
|
||
another system with a simple 'rcp' command, and test the new kernel on
|
||
this other system. Both systems are running Minix-386vm, with a
|
||
bootstrap system written by myself that understands Minix filesystems.
|
||
--
|
||
Kees J. Bot (kjb@cs.vu.nl)
|
||
Systems Programmer, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: lturetsk@minerva.cis.yale.edu (Lenny Turetsky)
|
||
Subject: Status: PAS16 SCSI driver
|
||
Date: 2 Sep 1994 01:47:30 GMT
|
||
|
||
Can anyone tell me the status on the PAS16 SCSI driver?
|
||
|
||
I currently use the kernel supplied by Summer '94 Yggdrasil (1.1.0 ?) to
|
||
access my single-speed CD-ROM, and the driver seems to be really CPU
|
||
intensive.
|
||
|
||
What version (with what kernel) works well?
|
||
|
||
Thanx,
|
||
LT
|
||
|
||
--
|
||
_____________________________________________________________________
|
||
/| |
|
||
| | There are only two organizations that I know of that send armed |
|
||
| | men in dark suits and sunglasses to take money they haven't earned: |
|
||
| | the mafia and the government. -- Lenny Turetsky |
|
||
| | |
|
||
| | Lenny Turetsky (aka) lturetsk@minerva.cis.yale.edu |
|
||
| |_____________________________________________________________________|
|
||
|/_____________________________________________________________________/
|
||
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: longyear@netcom.com (Al Longyear)
|
||
Subject: Re: Which kernel should I get for PPP
|
||
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 1994 14:54:07 GMT
|
||
|
||
rene@renux.frmug.fr.net (Rene COUGNENC) writes:
|
||
|
||
>Ce brave rxr401 ecrit:
|
||
|
||
>> The FTP throughput depends on many things, e.g. distance from the server,
|
||
>> modems, etc. With 1.1.45 kernel (with its own ppp.c driver), I was
|
||
>> getting 1.4k to 1.6k per second. I tried the beta PPP drivers (available
|
||
>> from ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/longyear/prerelease/) but found them to
|
||
>> be slower. Perhaps Longyear would like to shed some light on this issue.
|
||
|
||
I usually try to stay out of debates about "which transfers faster?".
|
||
|
||
>I am using the beta PPP driver, and I don't notice any speed difference
|
||
>compared to the standard one: I get 1.4k to 1.6k per second whatever
|
||
>version I use; and this is on a 386/25... go figure :-)
|
||
|
||
I have been playing with ttcp, netperf, and nettest. My 486 DX50, and
|
||
ZyXEL modem (in V.42bis), and talking to a Sun Sparc system with
|
||
Morningstar PPP, I now get 1.83K bytes/second with the ttcp data
|
||
during the "off hours" on the Sparc. I must do more testing to
|
||
evaluate the speed before I will be happy with publishing the results.
|
||
|
||
The reason that I said that "it seems to be faster" is that I was
|
||
getting only a 1.0 K byte/second transfer over the same configuration
|
||
to the same system with the previous software.
|
||
|
||
There is a saying in the automobile commercials in the U.S.A. "Your
|
||
mileage may vary."
|
||
|
||
FTP transfer times have too many variables to be meaningful. They will
|
||
vary depending upon the data being sent, the speed of your local disk,
|
||
the speed of the remote disk, the process loading on your system and
|
||
the remote, etc.
|
||
|
||
If you wanted to believe in just ftp transfer speeds, then I have
|
||
transferred files over my PPP link with 3.8K bytes/second. (The file
|
||
was a small, text document.)
|
||
|
||
As with any other scientific measurement, the experiment must be
|
||
recreateable at other sites to be verifiable. Using ftp is just too
|
||
variable.
|
||
|
||
I must admit that I haven't heard about 5 K bytes per minute. Are you
|
||
sure that you are not using a AT&T 103 modem (300 Bits/second)? Also
|
||
don't try to do a FTP transfer to a PC's diskette drive. Another
|
||
possibility is that you do not have flow control enabled and are
|
||
overruning the modem's buffer area which corrupts the TCP frames and
|
||
requires that they be re-sent. The flow control needs to be enabled at
|
||
both ends.
|
||
|
||
--
|
||
Al Longyear longyear@netcom.com
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: csmith@convex.com (Chris Smith)
|
||
Subject: Re: ext2fs floppy/82077 corruption with 1.1.49
|
||
Date: 1 Sep 1994 21:13:00 -0500
|
||
|
||
From: ddelsig@uoft02.utoledo.edu
|
||
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 1994 04:14:02 GMT
|
||
|
||
>1) mke2fs a floppy
|
||
>2) mount it and copy a big (~500k) file to it (or several files)
|
||
>3) unmount it but _don't_ eject it
|
||
>4) run "e2fsck -vrf /dev/fd0" --- it will come up clean (reading the cache)
|
||
>5) eject it and immediately stick it back in (set disk change flag)
|
||
>6) Repeat step 4 -- you will get most of the blocks in the above file(s)
|
||
> being marked as "not in use".
|
||
>
|
||
>Paul.
|
||
|
||
I've got a Compaq Concerto with an 82077 on it, running kernel
|
||
1.1.49. I followed your instructions on how to screw up my
|
||
floppies, and was not able to generate any errors.
|
||
|
||
It reproduces for me, with 1.1.48. The floppy controller's on an AHA1742.
|
||
Tried minixfs too, no complaints from fsck then.
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: orc@pell.com (Orc)
|
||
Subject: Re: Future of linux -- the sequel
|
||
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 1994 21:10:40 GMT
|
||
|
||
In article <3456g5$1ekr@yuma.acns.colostate.edu>,
|
||
Larry Pyeatt <pyeatt@CS.ColoState.EDU> wrote:
|
||
|
||
>What? I was unaware that any company was still making such slow
|
||
>machines. You can get a VL bus motherboard with MIPS R4600 processor
|
||
>that makes Pentium look like a 4.77 8086.
|
||
|
||
I find it hard to believe that a R4600 is 50(*) times faster
|
||
than a 586, even if you compare it to the slowest 586 on the market.
|
||
And if it's running off local bus, I'd not exactly boast about that.
|
||
|
||
>Why waste money on such
|
||
>a junky architecture as Intel when there are good processors available.
|
||
|
||
Because (a) Intel boxes are cheap, and (b) I don't see the
|
||
architecture from the operating system. For the $2000 difference
|
||
between, say, a Sparc Classic and a cheap 486/99 box you can do a
|
||
lot. Of course you don't get the Sparc bus, which is much better
|
||
than the current crop of PC busses (except, perhaps, PCI, which I
|
||
have no experience with), but for a low number of users, seeing
|
||
1mbyte/sec across the bus is not appreciably different than
|
||
3mbyte/sec.
|
||
|
||
But if you're doing mainly floating point, I agree with you
|
||
completely. Intel floating-point sucks dead bunnies through a
|
||
straw.
|
||
|
||
>Compare the price/performance of processors and Intel comes out to
|
||
>make the worst processors in existence.
|
||
|
||
*sigh* Were that that were true. I keep reading about these
|
||
other processors, like the PPC and the various MIPS chips, which
|
||
are quoted at much less than their counterpart from Intel, but
|
||
when it gets down to the marketplace, the cheapest I've seen for
|
||
a motherboard (unless you're looking for a Sparc motherboard) is
|
||
around $4k for a R3000. Now, considering that with a little bit of
|
||
shopping I could get a pair of 586/60 _boxes_ for this, where is
|
||
the advantage of getting that R3000 board?
|
||
|
||
____
|
||
david parsons \bi/ Who clung to his Atari ST because of architectural
|
||
\/ superiority, but gave up when part replacement got
|
||
more expensive than buying Intel boxes.
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
From: goer@quads.uchicago.edu (Richard L. Goerwitz)
|
||
Subject: dlfcn; dynamic loading
|
||
Reply-To: goer@midway.uchicago.edu
|
||
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 1994 00:45:10 GMT
|
||
|
||
Has anyone considered implementing dynamic loading of functions,
|
||
like what we find in OSF and SunOS (dlfcn)? Just how complicated
|
||
would this be?
|
||
|
||
--
|
||
|
||
-Richard L. Goerwitz goer%midway@uchicago.bitnet
|
||
goer@midway.uchicago.edu rutgers!oddjob!ellis!goer
|
||
|
||
------------------------------
|
||
|
||
|
||
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
|
||
|
||
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
|
||
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
|
||
|
||
Internet: Linux-Development-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
|
||
|
||
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.development) via:
|
||
|
||
Internet: Linux-Development@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
|
||
|
||
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
|
||
nic.funet.fi pub/OS/Linux
|
||
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
|
||
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
|
||
|
||
End of Linux-Development Digest
|
||
******************************
|